Judge Kavanaugh/Dr. Ford

[John Adams]

Wow. What a disgusting and embarrassing abuse of American democracy these hearings are, as well as being a saddening and anger-evoking example of how low American politicians (on BOTH sides) will sink regarding the tactics they will employ to get what they want. 

The most important outcome (whether/not Kavanaugh is vetted for a seat on the Supreme Court) seems completely lost; buried under a smokescreen topic that the Democrats have initiated. A topic that preys on how raw the emotions are regarding the #metoo movement. Instead of the question being "Should Kavanaugh be seated?", the question of the day has become, "Is Dr. Ford credible?"

That is the wrong question to ask, IMO. The question should be, "Is Dr. Ford's testimony effective in proving that Kavanaugh should not be vetted?" If her testimony is not effective, then it's worthless.

It seemed very clear from yesterday's broadcast that Dr. Ford's responses to the questions she was asked (when she actually was asked a question, as opposed to being lauded for her bravery) served ONLY to bring comfort to victims of assault, and to strengthen the causes of the #metoo movement. I found her to be completely ineffective in regards to the pertinent goal.

Although laudable, brave, and relevant to the purpose and social causes of the #metoo movement, that is not the subject of, nor the purpose for her appearance. In fact, her responses to the relevant questions asked hurt her credibility as a person who could demonstrate that Kavanaugh should not be vetted.

She appeared to be an emotionally vulnerable person who repeatedly demonstrated that the constant coddling by her attorneys was necessary. A person who, for whatever reason,  seemed unable to cognitively understand the meaning of some questions asked (and repeatedly referred to her hippocampus as if it were an unattached homunculus). A person who seemed vulnerable to manipulation by her "beach friends" (who's influence she herself credited for initiating any action). A person who demonstrated the plausibility that the party at which the alleged sexual misconduct took place was non-existent, and by her own admission, discredits her best friend's reliability as a witness due to the friend's "health" issues.

It might seem irrelevant, but I found the questions, and Dr. Ford's demeanor and responses to them regarding her fear of flying to be important. Again, Dr. Ford's own admission that flying was tolerable when it was necessary to pursue the hobbies/events she enjoyed vs being an emotionally debilitating issue when not, speaks to the possibility that perhaps Dr. Ford has the ability to pick and choose how she perceives and responds to emotionally distressing situations (keeping in mind that when asked how she was most effected by the alleged event, her response was regarding the laughter of her alleged attackers; not any sexual misconduct).

Although her appearance was extremely beneficial to victims of abuse, rape, and sexual misconduct, that was not the purpose for her presence before the committee. It served only as a smokescreen to push a LOT of emotional buttons.

The responses to questions she actually was able to provide, in combination with the absence of information that would seem she should recall (i.e., who drove her home after the alleged incident), as well as being unable to provide ANY reliable person to corroborate that the party actually took place at all make her appear to be an emotionally vulnerable person who may have been manipulated into a false accusation.

If anyone proved that Kavanaugh should not be vetted, it was Kavanaugh. His opening statement and his demeanor were convincing and effective as portraying himself as someone falsely accused. I believe much of what he said regarding the effects to his career, his family and his life. HOWEVER...

Nearly every moment after that demonstrated that he is what my fraternity brothers used to call a "DWE" (pronounced, [dwee], and meaning 'D!ck With Ears'.

The emotional reference he made to his father in his opening statement, regarding why he kept calendars as diaries for decades was very touching. It can also be negatively interpreted however, that both he and his father might be anal-retentive. His behavior and responses throughout the rest of his appearance before the committee make me lean towards the latter conclusion. 

I found the calendars to be important. Their presence, in combination with Dr. Ford's inability to provide any witness that can corroborate her allegations (and not singularly the allegation of the assault - but that her witnesses, under penalty of perjury, claim that the party never took place at all) lead me to believe that there was no party. If the claim that the assault took place at a party is false, I am open to the possibility that the the allegation of sexual assault or misconduct to Dr. Ford may also be - at least not by Kavanaugh.

As his appearance before the committee continued, Kavanaugh demonstrated over, and over again that there is a very large and noticeable discrepancy between how he (and the 40-some women who provided written support) describes himself regarding how he interacts with women, and his ability/inability to act in a mature, unbiased manner.

I found some of his behavior to be so immature and repulsive that I had to stop watching in points. His apology to Senator Klobuchar after the first session break appeared neither authentic, nor recalcitrant. If anything, it appeared that he felt it to be nothing more than required.

There are only few things I feel I can be more certain about after viewing what I feel was an ugly and embarrassing broadcast.

One is that the party where the alleged incident took place most likely never occurred. Another is that there may have been something that happened to Dr. Ford regarding sexual misconduct, but that it seems doubtful that Kavanaugh was involved. Finally it seems extremely clear to me that Kavanaugh should NOT be vetted for a seat on the Supreme Court. 

[Islander_fan]

I totally disagree. 

First off, this wasn't anything to do with the Me too movement. I'll grant you that it felt like everyone who started speaking to her, ended up applauding her for coming in. After awhile it felt like it was some sort of verbal tick. 

 But, this isn't the first time in history a woman came forward to admit that someone up for the supreme court, came out, and said that the judge in question was sexually abusive. Of course, I am talking about Anita Hill. John Oliver did a serious interview with her. During that interview she said that that things have a long way to go before issues of sexual harassment get better. We can feel that they are, say that they are, but in reality, specially when it comes to cases of sexual harassment, it's not getting any better. To me, from a societal standpoint, it feels that if we keep telling each other that, we may end up believing it. 

The fact that Ford asked for, and was denied an FBI investigation only shows to me one thing. it shows that the republicans made up their minds about all of this and what their outcome would be prior to Ford's testifying even occurring.  If you feel that Ford wasn't harassed/ question why she had the balls to come forward now (or even at all) go for it. But, the fact is that we haven't  really moved forward as a society regarding sexual harassment. And, if you think the Me Too movement is a bit much, fine. But, we are treating sexual harassment like it's a meh subject. We know it's there, we know it's bad. Yet, we realize that this is in fact an issue, and that's as far as we go with it, realization without action. 

[adamgreer]

The misogyny is strong in that original post.

[UncleCharlie]

adamgreer said: "The misogyny is strong in that original post."

Also the stupidity, The lack of understanding of what happens to someone when they are a victim of sexual assault and have to talk about it publicly is stunning.

 

[yankeefan7]

"The fact that Ford asked for, and was denied an FBI investigation only shows to me one thing. it shows that the republicans made up their minds about all of this and what their outcome would be prior to Ford's testifying even occurring"

Two quick points. Kavanaugh has already gone through six FBI background checks and nothing was found about him attacking anyone sexually. Is the FBI incompetent?  You do know that in these background checks they do talk to people throughout your entire life including HS. The other point is the update that they will be doing another FBI background check this week which will make it seven background checks. 

[John Adams]

Islander_fan said: "First off, this wasn't anything to do with the Me too movement. I'll grant you that it felt like everyone who started speaking to her, ended up applauding her for coming in. After awhile it felt like it was some sort of verbal tick."

I think that it shouldn't have been about the #metoo movement, but I was very impressed by one of Senator Leahy's early statements:

"Dr. Ford, no matter what happens with this hearing today, no matter what happens to this nomination, I know, and I hear from so many in my own state of Vermont, there are millions of victims and survivors out there who have been inspired by your courage. I am.

Bravery is contagious. Indeed, that’s the driving force behind the MeToo movement. And you sharing your story is going to have a lasting, positive impact on so many survivors in our country. We owe you a debt of gratitude for that, Doctor."

You noticed (as did I) that "it felt like everyone who started speaking to her, ended up applauding her for coming in". I do not discount her bravery in any way, and although the "lasting, positive impact on so many survivors in our country" that Sen. Leahy spoke of laudable, exemplary, and worthy of recognition, it should not have been the focus for her appearance. Yet, it was.

[John Adams]

UncleCharlie said: "adamgreer said: "The misogyny is strong in that original post."

Also the stupidity, The lack of understanding of what happens to someone when they are a victim of sexual assault and haveto talk about it publicly is stunning."

What is "stunning" is how easily you both responded in a similar manner as Kavanaugh's - with immature non-responses that are meant to insult rather than inform.

I think you must have missed (certainly didn't absorb) Prosecutor Mitchell's line of questioning regarding the best practices for interviewing victims of trauma. This hearing was a travesty that used Dr. Ford as a tool to serve its end, and did it in a way that was clearly disrespectful of Dr. Ford's emotional needs/best outcomes. 

[dramamama611]

His entire demeanor thru this should disqualify him from being seen as suitable for the Supreme Court.

[John Adams]

dramamama611 said: "His entire demeanor thru this should disqualify him from being seen as suitable for the Supreme Court."

I completely agree.

I would add that not only his demeanor should be observed, but the examples he demonstrated regarding conduct, and his lack of reasoning skills. Specifically, my opinion was sealed after his exchange with Senator Klobuchar, of whom he initially said, "I appreciate our meeting together, and I appreciate how you handled the prior hearing, and I have a lot of respect for you." 

KLOBUCHAR: OK. Drinking is one thing, but the concern is about truthfulness, and in your written testimony, you said sometimes you had too many drinks. Was there ever a time when you drank so much that you couldn’t remember what happened, or part of what happened the night before?
KAVANAUGH: No, I — no. I remember what happened, and I think you’ve probably had beers, Senator, and — and so I…
KLOBUCHAR: So you’re saying there’s never been a case where you drank so much that you didn’t remember what happened the night before, or part of what happened.
KAVANAUGH: It’s — you’re asking about, you know, blackout. I don’t know. Have you?
KLOBUCHAR: Could you answer the question, Judge? I just — so you — that’s not happened. Is that your answer?
KAVANAUGH: Yeah, and I’m curious if you have.
KLOBUCHAR: I have no drinking problem, Judge.
KAVANAUGH: Yeah, nor do I.
KLOBUCHAR: OK, thank you.

The transcript lacks Kavavaugh's tone of voice, but still shows the immature "I know you are, but what am I?" kind of middle school argument that should NOT be utilized by a Supreme Court Judge.

...and that's how he interacts with someone he "respects". 

Huh... 

[yankeefan7]

"KAVANAUGH: It’s — you’re asking about, you know, blackout. I don’t know. Have you?
KLOBUCHAR: Could you answer the question, Judge? I just — so you — that’s not happened. Is that your answer?
KAVANAUGH: Yeah, and I’m curious if you have.
KLOBUCHAR: I have no drinking problem, Judge.
KAVANAUGH: Yeah, nor do I.
KLOBUCHAR: OK, thank you."

Maybe after many hours of hearings, six FBI background checks (going on seven), answering more written questions (over 1200) than all previous Supreme Court nominees combined and having to defend an allegation where the accuser does not remember the exact day/year or the exact location he is finally getting a bit annoyed. If he "calmly" answered every question than I am sure Democrats would blast him and say he showed no passion in his defense. I truly doubt anybody will know what really happened that night.  I stated in another post asking another poster whether the FBI is incompetent? How did they miss this accusation?  From what I have read, FBI investigations talk to people throughout your entire life and that includes HS.

[John Adams]

yankeefan7 said: "I stated in another post asking another poster whether the FBI is incompetent? How did they miss this accusation? From what I have read, FBI investigations talk to people throughout your entire life and that includes HS."

I think it's because the accusation was not disclosed to the FBI by those who should have brought it to their attention in a timely manner - but didn't. 

You also wrote, "Maybe after many hours of hearings, six FBI background checks (going on seven), answering more written questions (over 1200) than all previous Supreme Court nominees combined [...]"

I don't know if you have the answer, but I'm curious regarding the reason(s) a need was felt to do six background checks and to require answers to over 12000 written questions (more than all previous Supreme Court nominees combined)? If I have the timeline correct, all of that was required even before the Dr. Ford allegation surfaced.

I would hope that Kavanaugh's years as a judge might have given him opportunity to observe, learn, or acquire skills to utilize in high stress situations like the one he is currently experiencing. Considering that this situation - one where it is his reputation and his veracity at stake - would be the most relevant and impactful time to exercise those skills. His appearance did not show any sign of those skills (if he has them at all).

We're taking about a lifetime appointment to the highest court in the United States. My expectation is that those seated should be the "superheroes" (using a simplistic term) of all judges practicing in the US.

Although I do not feel that the tactics being used to discredit him are righteous (which is only one aspect of why I find the recent hearing to be such a travesty), neither has he demonstrated, or even hinted that he can exercise the kind of superior judgement required to be seated on the Supreme Court for his/my lifetime.

[javero]

My dad and I have gone over this subject several times since Dr Ford and Judge K gave their testimonies.  We both think that Judge K is lying through his teeth about the events marked on his calendar, especially the Renate Alumnus explanation.  We both know the "bro code" inside out.  However, neither of us found Dr Ford's testimony that compelling.  The absence of physical evidence is particularly disturbing which arguably makes much of the case devolve into he said,she said.  I so want to believe her full account.  But, I need more corroborating evidence to support her claims. 

Perhaps, the latest FBI investigation will produce some findings to support Dr Ford.   Fortunately, the FBI will be able to get Mark Judge's version of the events under penalty of perjury.  My dad, however, suspects that Judge K and his buddy have been busy synchronizing their lies all weekend, with GOP operatives setting up an offshore hush money account for Mark Judge.  Even if Judge K is confirmed and seated, in an ideal world, the Dems will regain both chambers of the Congress and fast track articles of impeachment via the House to remove both Trump and Judge K from office.  I sure as hell wouldn't want some partisan hack with entitlement issues like Judge K to preside over a trial with me as the defendant or respondent. 

He showed his true colors last week before that Senate committee meeting during which Senator Amy Klobuchar should have handed him his ass.  I've cooled on her as a serious contender for the White House in 2020 mainly due to her milquetoast reaction to his treatment of her.

[UncleCharlie]

John Adams said: "What is "stunning" is how easily you both responded in a similar manner asKavanaugh's- with immature non-responses that are meant to insult rather than inform.

I think you must have missed (certainly didn't absorb) Prosecutor Mitchell's line of questioning regarding the best practices for interviewing victims of trauma. This hearing was a travesty that used Dr. Ford as a tool to serve its end, and did it in a way that was clearly disrespectful of Dr. Ford's emotional needs/best outcomes."

You're an expert on Dr. Ford's emotional needs and best outcomes? With a comment like "She appeared to be an emotionally vulnerable person who repeatedly demonstrated that the constant coddling by her attorneys was necessary." you demonstrate you haven't the faintest idea of what it is like for a victim of sexual assault to testify before a Senate committee on national TV being questioned as if she's the one who committed the crime. 

I will agree with one thing you said. My response was not meant to inform as someone who would make a comment like that is clearly incapable of being informed of anything so I long ago stopped wasting my time trying to "inform" people like that.

[Broadway Joe]

Personally thought every senator in that room came across rather terrible. I'm more surpised that all these idiots somehow get people to vote for them in the first place. Embarrassing.

[ScottyDoesn'tKnow2]

Broadway Joe said: "Personally thought every senator in that room came across rather terrible. I'm more surpised that all these idiots somehow get people to vote for them in the first place. Embarrassing."

Wait until you hear some of those House Reps speak. You wonder what rock they crawled out of.

[Beedlebard]

Surely the multiple lies he’s been caught in will prevent the senate from approving his nomination... I can only hope!

I did love the SNL cold opening take on this trial.